night of the police station attack.
Many journalists who tried to tell Al
Araibi’s story – and sought comment
from Salman – were issued with legal
writs by the AFC president’s lawyers to
prevent publication. Yet enough of the
story got out for many to believe that Al
Araibi ultimately cost Salman the top job
at FIFA.
With Al Araibi behind bars in Bangkok,
AFC’s belated statement of support also
handed responsibility over to senior vice-
president Praful Patel due to Salman’s
“conflict of interest”.
That appeared to fly in the face of
FIFA’s own human-rights statutes, yet
Salman will again stand for the AFC
presidency in April. Only when Hakeem
had arrived back on Australian soil did
the AFC issue a statement that it was
“extremely pleased with the decision of
the courts in Thailand”.
Back in Australia, Al Araibi’s case was
seen as a watershed moment for sport,
and for football in particular. With the
game increasingly in thrall to the financial
muscle of Asia, would football stand up
for one of their own? Or would it turn a
blind eye, due to the influence wielded by
regimes such as the ones in Bahrain?
Most in football passed the test, but a
bigger conundrum is whether the game
accepts that football and politics are
inextricably intertwined. That thorny
problem will have its first real test when
Asia casts its electoral votes on April 6.
Can Salman continue leading football
in the region when, by his own admission,
he is conflicted by his relationship with
the Bahraini ruling family? And what of
the other candidates?
Saoud Al Mohannadi of Qatar was
given a one-year suspension by FIFA in
2016 for refusing to co-operate with an
inquiry into an unnamed third party. The
suspension was lifted upon appeal in
2017 after the appeal committee found
the evidence available was “not sufficient”.
The third candidate is Mohamed
Khalfan Al Romaithi of the UAE, the
country which barred Qataris from
attending the recent Asian Cup due to
the ongoing blockade involving Qatar
and its neighbours.
So much for the tournament’s official
slogan of “bringing Asia together”.
The only people who achieved real
unity were those who fought for Hakeem
Al Araibi’s release.
Simon Hilltwo months while Bahrain applied for
his extradition to answer the historical
charges. Al Araibi claimed he would be
tortured into a confession if sent back.
Meanwhile, back in Australia,
something was stirring. Led by former
international Craig Foster, the football
community rallied around Al Araibi’s
cause. Social-media campaigns, petitions
and rallies all built publicity around the
case of the semi-pro footballer, whose
club side – Pascoe Vale in the regional
league of Victoria – had never seen
media interest like it.
Under pressure from campaigners, the
Australian prime minister Scott Morrison
contacted his Thai counterpart, FIFA and
the IOC put out statements requesting
his release, and high-profile football
personalities such as Robbie Fowler
and Didier Drogba lent their support.
Only the AFC remained silent, even
preventing questions on the topic at the
Asian Cup in the UAE in January. Only
after almost two months of Al Araibi’s
incarceration did the confederation feel
compelled to speak.
The reason for the delay? AFC
president Sheikh Salman was horribly
conflicted. Salman not only leads Asian
football, and is by extension a FIFA
vice-president, but he is also a member
of the Bahraini ruling family.
Salman also had history with Al Araibi.
Upon his arrival in Australia in 2016 the
player had spoken out against Salman in
the run-up to FIFA’s presidential election,
in which Salman was a candidate. Al
Araibi accused Salman of refusing to
offer assistance with his situation, even
though he claimed Salman – who was
also the Bahraini FA president – knew
full well he’d played for Al Shabab on the
In chains...attending
court in BangkokConflicted...
Sheikh SalmanPEOPLE AND PLACES IN THE NEWS